Profound stupidity – EU policy on Ukraine

If you wanted a definition of profound stupidity it would be hard to find anything more expressive. This is the EU’s Foreign Affairs Representative Kaja Kallas, a former Estonian politician, addressing the European Parliament yesterday. This is a lengthy extract from her speech. (I’ve missed out the obvious part about strengthening NATO).

Russia is:

violating our airspace;

conducting provocative military manoeuvres near EU borders;

targeting our trains and planes;

attacking our pipelines, undersea fiber-optic cables, and electricity grids;

assaulting our industry, including companies supporting Ukraine.

And is recruiting criminals to carry out sabotage attacks

And it is steadily building up its military forces and expanding its nuclear arsenal.

Last year Russia spent more on defence than the EU combined.

This year, Russia is spending more on defence than on its own health care, education and social policy combined.

This is a long-term plan for long-term aggression. You don’t spend that much on military if you do not plan to use it.

Those who border Russia have always felt Russia’s provocations more. Those of us with a history of Soviet imperialism feel it the most. But Russia’s threat to transatlantic unity and security is a problem for us all.

Every European country – and indeed every NATO ally – must be thinking about defence. In 2014, NATO countries pledged to actually invest 2% of GDP in defence by 2024. But in one year, the geopolitical situation has shifted so dramatically that we are now looking at a 5% target.

Europe’s collective economic might is unmatched. I don’t believe there is any threat we can’t overcome, if we act together, and with our NATO allies.

—–

The European Union is doing its part here too, not least because Ukraine is Europe’s first line of defence.

We know that Russia responds to strength and nothing else. That is why we have just proposed an 18th sanctions package to pile on the pressure. Every sanction weakens Russia’s ability to fight this war.

Do not be fooled. Thanks to EU sanctions, Russia has lost tens of billions of euros in oil revenues. Its sovereign wealth fund declined by 6 billion only last month. Sanctions work.

In parallel, the EU is the biggest provider of support to Ukraine, including over 50 billion euro in military assistance.

We have to do more for Ukraine, for our own security too. To quote my friend, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, if we don’t help Ukraine further, we should all start learning Russian. The stronger Ukraine is on the battlefield today, the stronger they will be around the negotiation table, when Russia finally is ready to talk. [1][2]

A few comments:

i. Russia may be doing some of the nasty things in the bullet point list at the start of her speech. But; the part she misses out is that Russians are dying, in Russia, as a result of attacks by European missiles e.g. UK and French Storm Shadow missiles. On the battlefield tens of thousands of Russians have, no doubt, been killed by European weapons. The UK is (I would assume) supplying intelligence; in fact Storm Shadows need to be loaded with data which can only come from intelligence capabilities which Ukraine does not have. Why would Russia not attack us back? Ukraine is running a sabotage campaign in Russia, including recruiting teenagers and vulnerable people to carry out sabotage operations. So; why so terrible about Russian sabotage operations? Surely what is good for the goose is good for the gander? At the start of the war when everyone in the West was getting jittery about a nuclear response from Russia, this site, explained that in reality, the most likely response from Russia would not be nuclear but would be the kind of sabotage operations referred to here; this was all a predictable response to Western actions. Kaja Kallas’s view reflects a common pattern in the West; a total blindness to what our actions are doing to Russia. This is, precisely analogous to how psychopaths behave. The wife-beater slaps his wife around, and when she, under pressure from all these attacks, reaches for a knife and stabs him, he becomes enraged. How dare she? A total blindness to what your side is doing and how you might be provoking the other side.

ii. “This is a long-term plan for long-term aggression. You don’t spend that much on military if you do not plan to use it.”. This one is doing the rounds too. As this site has pointed out before, one of the main criteria to be a successful European politician is to be able to sing the party line. You mustn’t think; very ironically, this is possibly analogous to how matters stood in the USSR. The same point applies. Why is Russia building up its military? To attack the EU? Or, could it be because there are now two new NATO members, one with a very long border with them in the North, and because the EU is talking about a massive campaign of re-armament in the context of endless statements about how dangerous Russia is? At the very least, this is a case of a classic arms spiral. But, once again, this total blindness about what we are doing and how Russia might be responding to that.

iii. “Those who border Russia have always felt Russia’s provocations more. Those of us with a history of Soviet imperialism feel it the most. But Russia’s threat to transatlantic unity and security is a problem for us all.”. Well, let’s leave out the historically ignorant “Soviet imperialism”, and concede that the Baltic States do have reason to fear Russia. They broke free from the Russian Empire after WWI only to be forcibly integrated into the USSR during and after WWII, a process which involved very serious repressions. Putin is on record as acknowledging that the Baltic states have reason to be anxious about Russia. However; Kallas extrapolates from this to “Russia is a threat to us all”. This, in a way, is doing what the Kiev regime is doing; trying to insert themselves into a European/NATO security blanket by persuading the rest of Europe that Russia is a threat to them, the rest of Europe. The folly of this tactic is that it will not create a stable security architecture on the European continent. Kallas may feel safer if she is inside a heavily defended European compound, with spikes pointing fiercely at Russia, but this situation is not stable. In a state of heavily armed constant confrontation, there is always a risk of an accident or a small incident getting out of hand. Everyone understood that this was a risk during the Cold War. What wisdom is there in creating a Cold War II? Despite the legitimate fears of the Baltic states, Kallas would be better using her position at the heart of European politics to work towards a security architecture for the European continent, which includes Russia. (All Russia wants is no NATO in Ukraine and Georgia and a reduction in NATO forces in other NATO countries near Russian borders. This is no more than, for example, the US wanting Soviet missiles out of Cuba There is also scope for agreement on intermediate range missiles).

Finally, of course, there is no actual evidence of any Russian intent to attack Western Europe, and, as Putin has commented, they would be totally mad to attack a NATO country. (His phrase was “only a madman in his delirium would consider attacking NATO” [3]). Why would Russia do this? Again; this is the pattern; the song is “Russia is irrational and aggressive and might attack a European country at any moment”; but no one, ever, explains, just why Russia might take that extremely unlikely course of action. They just shout “imperialism” and “Putin is nostalgic for the USSR/Russian Empire” – but they never provide any scholarly evidence for the wholly unlikely propositions a) that Putin is indeed a “madman in his delirium” or b) why an organised country with a stable and rational leadership elite would allow a madman to drag the country to destruction on a personal whim.

iv. “We know that Russia responds to strength and nothing else. That is why we have just proposed an 18th sanctions package to pile on the pressure. Every sanction weakens Russia’s ability to fight this war.” No doubt, sanctions have very significantly damaged the Russian economy. However; the fact is that the economy is resilient, as this piece from a pro-Western UK think-tank makes clear. [4] The Russian economy is under pressure and the prospects for long-term growth are reduced from what they were before 2022, but there has been no collapse. All the predictions that after a few weeks of sanctions Russia would no longer be able to produce missiles have evaporated. By many accounts, the Russian army is stronger than they were before the war. [5] They appear to have no problems building new missiles. The latest sanctions packets are mostly trying to plug a few holes in the existing sanctions and add a few more entities to the sanctioned list. The one serious new development is a block on re-imports of refined Russian oil e.g. from India, but even here, there is plenty of scope for this refined petroleum to be re-directed to friendly countries, such as China, who can simply choose to buy this and reduce quantities they are currently buying from e.g. Saudi Arabia. With the Iran crisis unfolding the demand for Russia’s oil is going to remain strong. Western sanctions are nearly maxed out and they have simply failed to knock Russia out. There is only one sanctions option left; the US imposing secondary sanctions on all Russian energy exports in an attempt to finally cut off revenue from energy sales. The chances of the US doing that are remote; the effect on Western economies would be too great. Is Kallas unaware that the EU is still importing huge amounts of Russian gas? Imports of Russian LNG are soaring. [6] And while piped gas has been reduced, it has not been eliminated; current levels are about 1/3 of pre-war levels. [7] My rough and ready calculation suggests that the EU paid Russia about $20 billion for gas in 2024. According to France 24 the EU has imported a whopping €209 billion of Russian fuel since the start of the war! [8] This sum dwarfs the €50 billion in military aid to Ukraine which Kallas crows about! (Given that Kallas must know this, she is not even being honest). A combination of a total unwillingness to endure any suffering in the EU and the fact that, as Putin pointed out at the start, in a multilateral world there will always be other trading options, means that sanctions have not worked.

Kallas speaks about the EU’s “economic might” but she is over-estimating the case. The world is more multi-lateral than she thinks. And, another point, business is business. Exports of German cars to Kirgizstan have increased 700% since sanctions. If even EU businesses will do what they can to get round sanctions what chances do sanctions have of working in a world where Russia can trade with BRICS countries? The total GDP of BRICS is approximately equal to that of the EU. Even if the EU was prepared to feel the pain of full sanctions, which they are not, it is not clear that even that would be a sufficient lever to alter Russia’s course.

It is true that Russian reserves are dwindling, as Kallas crows elsewhere in the speech. If the government continues to spend on the military at the current rates, in three to four years the budget is going to come under significant pressure. But, what Kallas does not grasp is that so far the Russian people have not yet been asked to make significant sacrifices, (I am talking about the economy). People complain about rising prices, and certainly some people will have lost their jobs, but there are few visible signs of economic distress. Shopping centres and cafés are still busy, there are plenty of cars on the roads, including new ones. On the other hand, many people have benefited from the war economy; for example, wages for security guards are soaring, because of the lack of able-bodied men, due to the military and military industrial complex soaking up labour. My sense is that there is a lot more capacity in the system – even if things do get tougher.

The other point about the stupidity of the sanctions policy is that it shows no understanding of Russia’s reasons for this war. For Russia, the risk of NATO in Ukraine and a heavily militarised Ukraine run by extreme anti-Russian Ukrainian nationalists is existential. Russia is therefore willing to feel considerable pain to prevent this coming about. Sanctions may make certain business people regret the war, but the policy is being decided by security-military actors, not businessmen, and these people are willing to see economic pain in the rear, in order to achieve what they see as vital security outcomes.

Yes; sanctions “weaken” Russia and that might make Kaja Kallas feel good, but they are not going to alter the course of the war. (Iran has been under very tough sanctions for years but, in the end, the only way to finish their nuclear programme turns out to be bombing them).

v. “We have to do more for Ukraine, for our own security too.” This is the awful policy of using Ukraine to buttress European security, (as they imagine it). I wonder; do all Ukrainians really feel happy that their sons and brothers are dying to make Kaja Kallas feel safe and comfy in Estonia?’ (Especially when Germans aren’t even willing to turn down the heating to save them). Even if you believe that Russia is a threat to Western Europe, the strategy of trying to stop them with the lives of hundreds of thousands of people from Europe’s poorest country seems pretty cynical. Especially given that the borders of that country are closed and men of fighting age are being forcibly conscripted. (To keep Kaja Kallas comfy).

As always, it is so obvious, that there really is no thought, in Kaja Kallas’s remarks. What we see is a performance. The performance depends on being able to look presentable and sound articulate as you mouth a series of sound-bites for media consumption. Sound-bites which all the other players all parrot in synchronisation. European policy is not based on rational analysis, let alone a credible theory of inter-state relations. It appears to be driven by a series of politicians concerned about their careers and how they look in the media. The media itself, has a huge responsibility here. By studiously avoiding ever asking the hard questions, for example, “what evidence is there that Russia wants to invade Poland”, they allow this show to continue, with all its dangerous consequences.

Notes

Profound stupidity – EU policy on Ukraine

Related Posts

This week’s prize for wide-eyed acceptance of alternative realitiesThis week’s prize for wide-eyed acceptance of alternative realities

Let’s not get ahead of the matterLet’s not get ahead of the matter

One man’s “partisan operations” is another’s state terrorismOne man’s “partisan operations” is another’s state terrorism